Examination of Witnesses (Questions 773
- 779)
TUESDAY 15 JUNE 2004
DR CHRIS
POUNDER AND
MS CLAIRE
MCNAB
Q773 David Winnick: Good afternoon,
Dr Pounder and Ms McNab. Thank you for coming along and also many
thanks for your papers beforehand. Are there any opening statements
that you would like to make, first of all, Dr Pounder?
Dr Pounder: No, not particularly,
I will make my comments in relation to the questions asked.
Q774 David Winnick: Ms McNab?
Ms McNab: Perhaps just two comments
in relation to the overall impact of the ID card proposals on
trans people. The first is that trans people do not seek secrecy,
we are seeking privacy, and the reason the ID card proposals could
be so important for us is that by facilitating a system of much
wider disclosure of information the maintenance of that privacy,
which is particularly important to us in many aspects of our lives,
becomes a crucial issue in far more situations than it has been
previously, so it is a step change in terms of the magnitude of
the number of issues where disclosure becomes a factor, so that
is why we are particularly concerned.
Q775 David Winnick: Thank you very
much. We have your paper and moreover obviously there will be
questions. If I can put some questions to you first of all, Dr
Pounder. You are concerned, are you not, by the ability to share
or create linkages between personal data collections across a
whole range of government departments, or possibly rationalising
government databases. That is your concern from your paper. I
do put the point to you: is that not really part of joined-up
government? Do you have an objection in principle to the creation
of a linking-up system of other databases?
Dr Pounder: Before that I would
like to make one observation which is that the data sharing or
data linkage agenda in relation to the ID Card Bill has been largely
missing in the two previous consultation exercises. This agenda
has only come to the fore by looking at the clauses in the ID
Card Bill. Your previous witnesses, Mr Fisher for instance, at
Q421, talked about the fact that linkage with existing systems
is going to create a very enriched database and Vernon Jackson
in relation to local authorities described the address issues
that local authorities face because they cannot find decent addresses.
So the question is really pertinent. My concerns about data sharing
are limited to the question as to who is in control of the data
sharing. I do not mind if the individual concerned is in control
of the situation, and quite clearly there need to be exceptions
to this in relation to law enforcement and taxation, but it is
a question of who is in control of any data sharing. In relation
to the data sharing agenda there is a proposed Data Sharing Bill
which links to this ID card Bill because it is the ID card database
which will provide the central links. The Government have rejected
the idea of individual consent as a way of creating such linkages
in favour of compulsion. In relation to this ID Card Bill, as
you know there is compulsion as I have to provide my address,
I have to provide various details if I want to travel abroad or
I need a driving licence. In relation to the Data Sharing Bill
which is proposed, which was supposed to be out in Spring 2004,
the Government have said the following, this is on their web site
and it worth reading into the record because I did not put it
into the written evidence: "In terms of further enabling
legislation", that is enable to facilitate data sharing,
"our judgment is there is little purpose in progressing the
idea of general law to allow data sharing with consent."
What is proposed is that if an organisation has the purpose then
it I can data share to achieve that particular purpose without
consent. The DCA undertook an exercise in public acceptability
of data sharing and the conclusions of their survey, which in
a sense reflect some of the conclusions of the YouGov poll which
was mentioned last week, show concern about data sharing. The
poll taken on behalf of the DCA said that: "60% of the public
say they are "very" or "fairly concerned"
about public services sharing their personal information, with
22% "very concerned". That concern will dissipate if
the data subject, the individual concerned, is in control of or
consent to any data sharing. One question raised by a Member of
the Committee was that "My constituent wants data sharing",
and if that is what the constituent wants I have no difficulty
with that. The question is compulsion.
Q776 David Winnick: Dr Pounder, would
you be more happy if there were an explicit provision in the measure
preventing the register from having any links with any other databases?
Dr Pounder: No, I have no difficulty
with linkages, it is a question of the control and accountability
of the linkages. As soon as you go down the road of a provision
where there is a statutory requirement to share then, as I mentioned
in my written evidence, the controls under the Data Protection
Act largely disappear.
Q777 David Winnick: We come back
to control—
Dr Pounder: It is a question of
control.
Q778 David Winnick:—which to
you is a very crucial point?
Dr Pounder: Very crucial.
Q779 David Winnick: Have you put
those points to the Home Office?
Dr Pounder: Yes, I have.
| 
